Bourque Put on Waivers

Chris Bourque was placed on waivers at noon, the team has confirmed. The move could give the Caps some salary cap flexibility if the winger is claimed.

If he is not claimed, Bourque will start the season with the Caps in Boston, Coach Bruce Boudreau said.

While Bourque making the team out of camp was an accomplishment for the 2004 second round draft pick, his long term future in Washington is anything but guaranteed with the team up against the salary cap and both Tomas Fleischmann and Eric Fehr due back from injuries in a matter of weeks.

confusing at first read but likely a way to send Bourque down without losing him if he passes through this time. And with rosters submitted around the league, he might be able to be squeezed through...

so when fehr and and flash come back does he have to clear waivers again. I guess what is the compelling event to waive him now is the question. why do they need salary cap flexibility now at this moment.

so when fehr and and flash come back does he have to clear waivers again. I guess what is the compelling event to waive him now is the question. why do they need salary cap flexibility now at this moment.

Posted by: samb99

It was said on the last thread but... guessing because there is someone else who is going to be waived that the Caps might be interested in getting.

Oystrick is an underrated defenseman. He plays both ends of the ice and he's tough although not very big but he's built solidly. Surprised Atlanta put him on waivers. He's a good PP guy. They really have a horrible defense.

Deryk Engelland, ex Bear, had a good camp. He was one of the bubble players looking to stick. Bissonette gives you the big tough guy for cheap that can replace Brash.

Ryan Bayda is one of the better players on that list if we were looking for a depth checking forward (can't believe we would be tho)

Fleishmann had a blood clot in his leg and is on blodd thinners so he isn't allowed contact drills currently. Saw hime skating on his own at Kettler and he looks good and strong. I think they are shooting for mid October to get him back into contact drills, probably November before he sees ice time.

@StanleyCup1907 - Flash has deep vein thrombosis and is on blood thinners. He can't take a hit until he's done with the blood thinners, because of the possibility of excessive bleeding. He was diagnosed over the summer with a blood clot, which reportedly did move from his leg up his body, and had it moved up the other side, he might well have died from it. It's an unfortunate and nasty situation, and Flash got damned lucky that they caught it, and that it wasn't more serious. Last I heard, he'll be cleared for contact in early October.

@RogueBiscuit - It isn't the salary cap in this case. It's that Bourque is an attractive player that another team might pick up, freeing a space for us to pick up someone we need more than we need another forward.

I think that this means there is no immediate solution to the Nylander situation. If the Caps were ready to move Nylander (through waivers either to another NHL team or to a Eurpoean team) there would be no need to put Bourque through waivers as moving Nylander would provide both cap and roster size flexibility.

I've got to say, I'm a bit confused myself. Why would he be put on waivers NOW? IF he dosnet get claimed, he'll play with the Caps on Thursday?? If thats the case, why put him on waivers at all? Could someone please help me understand this. I consider myself a pretty big hockey fan, but I guess this is more of a CBA issue.
-So confused!!

I'm guessing the idea is: try to sneak Bourque through waivers now, when there are a ton of other Bourque-like players on the waiver wire. If he clears, he can still play something like 10 games with the Caps before he has to pass through waivers again if Fehr is ready.

koalatek, I guess that makes sense...I didnt know how long the grace period was. But still, I wouldnt be surprised to see Chris get picked up. I would look at either The Leafs or the Avs. I'm sure the Bruins would make room for him as well.

I'm guessing the idea is: try to sneak Bourque through waivers now, when there are a ton of other Bourque-like players on the waiver wire. If he clears, he can still play something like 10 games with the Caps before he has to pass through waivers again if Fehr is ready.

Posted by: koalatek

Thanks for the clarification on this. waiver rules make my my head spin.

If Bourque clears waivers, he'll have 10 NHL games or 30 days (whichever comes first) before he would have to clear waivers again. If he is reassigned to Hershey before 10 games/30 days, he doesn't need to clear waivers again.

It looks like McPhee may be trying to slip Bourque through waivers so he can stay up until Fleischmann or Fehr returns then be sent down without having to clear waivers again. Bourque has a better chance of clearing now than in a few weeks. It had to be done at some point and this probably the best time to do it when there so many players on waiver.

What if McPhee waited for 2 or 3 weeks then Fleischmann and Fehr returned and there was no longer room for Bourque? He would have to clear waivers at that point and it would be more likely that he gets picked up with a far smaller pool of waivered players and more teams with possible injuries and needs for replacements.

@capsfan387 - I think tmac2yao has the right of it. It'll be easier to slide Bourque through waivers NOW than it will be when Flash and/or Fehr are ready to come back, and with the 10-game/30-day grace period, that gives us enough time to get one of them back. Fehr should be back in a couple of weeks, and Flash by early November... If Bourque clears waivers now, he'll be set to stay for the duration of the Flash/Fehr absence, and then we can send him back WITHOUT worrying about him having to clear waivers again, at a time when teams might be more ready to collect him for nothing.

@capsfan387
From Bourque's perspective, it's not so bad, either he clears and is still with the Caps, or he's claimed and gets put on another NHL team's roster (to get claimed and assigned to an AHL roster requires waivers again, see Kris Beech). And another team might have fewer vets blocking a roster spot.

If Bourque clears waivers, he'll have 10 NHL games or 30 days (whichever comes first) before he would have to clear waivers again. If he is reassigned to Hershey before 10 games/30 days, he doesn't need to clear waivers again.

It looks like McPhee may be trying to slip Bourque through waivers so he can stay up until Fleischmann or Fehr returns then be sent down without having to clear waivers again. Bourque has a better chance of clearing now than in a few weeks. It had to be done at some point and this probably the best time to do it when there so many players on waiver.

Posted by: tmac2yao | September 29, 2009 2:41 PM | Report abuse

This makes a lot of sense. Put him up after the initial waivers went and people committed to their squads, and still while the current waver wires' crowded. Thanks to each who came up with this for helping to understand a crazy situation. Not so crazy I guess.

I don't see the Caps wanting Bissonette. If that was the case they should just have kept Sugden. I'd be happy if they were looking at Bizz but I don't think thats the case. McPhee would look pretty dumb if he reversed his stance on enforcers before the season even started.

still the biggest piece of bs ever. i hope he gets picked up, so he can go to a club that actually will use him more than just a fill in for other players. "oh you? you're only good until our inconsistent firecrotch gets back" haha ok maybe that last part was a little bit much of an attack on flash, he can handle it.

What this maneuver also tells Bourque is that his days in DC are numbered regardless. Either he gets claimed by another team now or in ten games or less in all likelihood the Caps will assign him to Hershey and he's back stuck in the minors. He's probably rooting for a team to claim him.

For what it's worth, someone in Hershey told me that there was very little interest in Bourque from other teams this summer when he was a RFA. Not sure if that's true or not...not sure if I trust my source.

oh and if anyone has been reading this blog as consistently as I have for the last year and especially over the summer and you had read my numerous Pro-Bourque comments I was always putting up, then my first comment in all caps would be very understandable to anyone who knows me. thank you very much

While I appreciate your Caps coverage, I'm a little surprised that there is no Caps Live Discussion on the Post website this week. The Skins get three a week, the Nats basically get one per week under the guise of Tom Boswell's weekly discussion and even the Wizards already have one this week even though the Wiz just commenced training camp. Yet for the Caps, nada. With the Caps season beginning Thursday, one would think the Post sports editors would deem it appropriate for you to conduct a Caps Live Discussion to kick-off the season. Guess not. In other news, the Times' print version has kicked off three days of Caps season-opening coverage, beginning with an NHL Preview today, an Alex Ovechkin Preview tomorrow and a Caps Preview on Thursday.

@iastdon - I respectfully point out to you that despite pneumonia, Fleischmann still posted a 19-goal, 18-assist season last year in 73 games. That put him on pace for 21 goals, 20 assists, which is pretty respectable, had he been able to play all 82 games. He also scored 3 goals and had an assist in 14 games for the playoffs. His numbers have improved every year he's played for the Caps. He had a S% of 14.5, which was second only to Alexander Semin for accuracy. In goals, he was 6th on the team, behind Ovechkin, Semin, Green, Laich, and Backstrom. He was 3rd on the team with 4 game-winning goals, behind only Ovechkin and Green. I hardly believe that sucks, though admittedly, his +/- is in the gutter at -3 (one of the worst on the team). Still, that is overcome by his production, which you can't say is that horrid, given where he lands in the group.

Fehr, despite needing bilateral shoulder surgery, posted 12 goals and 13 assists in 61 games. His numbers, too, have only improved over the last four seasons with the Caps. I defy you to play hockey with torn labrums (sp?) in both shoulders and not suck worse than Fehr!

It's understandable to get freaked out at the initial news but once you realize that Bourque all but assuredly had to clear waivers at some point and that this is the best time to do it, you should feel a little more relieved.

@ Monty2: Any chance you have people telling you how to do your job? Nothing in the world you say or do could or should make Tarik and the Washington Post do what you're telling them to do.

@capsfan387: Lay off the caffeine. You sound like you could use a dose of ritalin. Something's up but why waste so much energy thinking the worst when neither you nor the media know wtf is going on with Borque being placed on waivers. Chill out. You're like bright sunlight when you have a hangover and a migraine headache.

Capsfan387 lighten up, were talking a 4th line fringe player at best..Nice depth in a pinch, but if he could score 25 at the NHL level, he would've been here already.. They reached and drafted him to early anyway, just like Pokuluk, and Finley, oh yeah and don't forget everyone's favorite Schultz...

Fehr is going to play the season on bum shoulders? and you're saying that is going to be better than Bourque? Also, with Flash, he's got a freakin' blood clot. You're telling me that these guys will be able to produce more improved numbers than last year after missing significant training time due to recovery of injuries?

@topshelf - Hold your fire on Schultz. He packed on about 15 pounds over the summer, and is starting to use that 6'8 body of his on the ice... I was really pretty darned impressed with the big guy this pre-season.

@iastdon - No, Fehr is going to play after having both shoulders fixed over the summer and spending a significant time training, rehabilitating, and getting himself in shape. I was talking about LAST SEASON.

You said he sucked; I disagreed. Last season's numbers might have been off a bit from his potential because of the injury situation. Wait and see what he can do healthy before you say he sucks.

Flash is going to play after recovering from his blood clot; he's been skating, and looks good. He's back up to the weight he was at before his pneumonia, or close to it, and the only thing standing in his way right now is blood thinners. And believe-you-me, he's right to not take hits while he's on those. So same thing: wait and see what he can do healthy before you say he sucks.

Schultz can put on all the weight/muscle he wants. To me, he's still way too slow and he doesn't have the demeanor to be a physcial force. He's never going to be that.. Erskine's slow too, but he will take his man out hard if he gets a chance.

Not to beat a dead horse but for any of you nylander haters,why dont you read this blog for the real insight of whats going on.http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Steven-Hindle/On-Nylander-If-you-cant-trade-him-why-not-play-him/98/23291 i think the guy has gotten the wrong end of the stick and what wash. is doing or did to him is wrong.give the guy a chance to prove the naysayers wrong or give all the bashers the reason why they bashed in the first place.But for that money you gotta see what he can do. GO CAPS!

I'm sure a lot of other people have said this already, but this is purely a strategic play by GMGM. He did this last year with another player (can't remember who) but the purpose is that all other teams have more or less set rosters at this point and don't want to break chemistry. If Bourque clears, then he clears for something like a month and he goes down for free at a time when people might actually be looking for pickups on the waiver wire. Right now, the wire is flooded and he'll likely be overlooked.

@gratefuldid - Why don't I read it? Maybe because hockeybuzz.com is nothing more than sound and fury signifying nothing, and is a rumormonger from the depths of hell that is less about accuracy and more about spreading bad rumors and making inflammatory statements than anything else?

Why would we waive a player that made the team, and BB said worked hard and fit the team to save a half mil, when we hold onto a player that does not play and costs us 5.5 mil with Nylander. Nothing against the guy, just paying him so much for nothing seems like a waste of cap space.

do the caps have the ability to pull bourque back off waivers if claimed? i know that this happens in baseball all the time. guys are put on waivers to see if anyone is interested. if someone puts a claim on them the team pulls him back and tries to negotiate a trade...

Good responses IRTR, Schultz was solid in the pre-season and has yet again improved year over year.

As far as Nyls go, as I have said, he is a good player and I like him, but he is in the wrong situation now. I think he could still produce for us, but at this point I would rather see us with the money freed up.

@UVmCapsFan
Nyls has a No Movement Clause in his contract. You can't trade, re-assign or even waive the guy without his consent. The only way to get rid of Nyls is to either find a team who he likes or buy him out. The Caps won't buy him out because it would eat cap space they need for Backstrom and Semin extensions.

The most likely answer to your question about Bourque is posted several times above. Nobody here knows with absolute certainty but it seems that McPhee is trying to slip him through waivers so he doesn't have to be put on waivers in a few weeks when Flash and Fehr are healthy. There is a better chance he slips through today than in a few weeks.

@irockthered-first,why do you keep knocking everyones opinion?second,maybe you are right about the site but this is just stating the facts,not rumors.And look.i'm a TRUE caps fan that supports the WHOLE team and everyone on it so if he's on the team,why not give the guy a shot.thats all i'm say'n.And...GO CAPS!

Fleishmann is done for this season. Why? He did no training in the off season because of the blood clot. Yeah, he did some upper body, but you don't skate on your hands. He will have a horrible season for sure. Too bad for Caps.

LeftCoastCapsFan: Yes, our clients tell us regularly how they want us to do our job, and if we ignore them long enough, they no longer are our clients. Also, I did not "tell" Tarik to do anything, and I did not tell Tarik "how" to do his job. Rather, I merely suggested that a periodic Caps Live Discussion, particularly just prior to the season, may make sense, considering the Post Sports page runs approximately ten different Live Discussions a week, or forty a month, and not one in the past month has been about the Caps. Clearly, the many comments on this Caps page on a weekly basis shows how many of the Post readers are interested in the Caps and more Caps coverage. And seriously, do you really think the Post is disinterested in what their readers like, or want more of, on the Post Sports site, considering it is these readers and their page views that increase the Post's advertising revenue garnered from this site.

Coming from the "Washington Times": McPhee said the reason is the Caps needed a roster spot / salary cap space in case any player who was put on waivers from another team was someone they wanted to claim.

If the Caps don't see anyone they like more than Bourque and he clears waivers at noon on Wednesday, he will remain with the team and travel to Boston on Thursday.

And if Bourque is claimed by another team, the Caps will of course lose him for nothing.

McPhee said there was a good chance this was going to an issue in a couple of weeks anyway (when Eric Fehr and/or Thomas Fleischmann return from injury).

The Caps certainly don't want to lose Bourque, but as McPhee indicated, this roster squeeze was inevitable.

That's why Nyls is in doghouse... no movement is a fake, if they want you to out, you'll be out one way or another...

What surprises me is that GMGM actually showed his support to Nyls. He once commented that Nyls shoulder didn't heal 100% or he didn't have enough time to rehab it... I thought it was making sense, but it didn't... Maybe BB really wants Nyls out...

Nyls can be waived, and a team can pick him up, but Nyls has to agree to go. And if he does they only have to pay 1/2 of salary if I understand waive system properly. He will not go to many teams I guess, his salary will not change where ever he plays. $4.5 mill or whatever the total his, just who pays him.

Oops also if they cut him, the salary cap this year has to absorb all remaining salary, so next years pay would hit this year's cap. Again if I understand the cap properly. Please correct if I am wrong. Next year his NMC expires and his salary goes way down. He will not be a problem next year one way or the other.

@gratefuldid - Did you read my earlier comments? I said that A) we don't have all the facts on the Nylander ("No Movement Clause") situation, and B) I was reserving judgment until we did, which, we probably never will. I also said that IF what appears to have been going on is what is going on, then yes, Nylander ("No Movement Clause")got a bum rap, and it sucks.

code,
do you have any specific knowledge that nyls has declined to go to another team? i think that's what you are alluding to, right. that they have asked him to waive it and he's declined therefore continuing to have the caps in a bad spot. i've not heard that he has been asked to waive the clause or whether he's declined.

other than that, what is nyls supposed to do other than show up and honor your contract.

rich, can they waive him w/out getting his consent up front? not exactly sure how it works but i dont think they can even put him on waivers w/out his approval.

A waiver claim is a forcible relocation of a player, something a NMC is designed to prevent, so you can't waive him.

BTW the "1/2 salary" thing only applies to Re-Entry Waivers, which are waivers coming up to the NHL.

@RichC3
You're thinking of the NFL. The NHL only recognizes buy-outs. Your cap hit for this year goes down, but the remaining cap hit gets spread out over twice the remaining years. There are buyout calculators out there that will do the math if you're really interested.

You can waive anybody, in this case Nyls, but with the no movement clause he is going to have to approve going to whoever picks him up. He certainly has the upper hand in this case. I doubt Nashville or Columbus is an option for example. Not even sure who has cap space to pick up the 2.5 Million that the team picking him up has to pay. Like the Caps last year pick up the Dman from Toronto only had to pay half his salary.

@dcsportsfan1 - You're right. The Caps can do nothing to move Michael Nylander ("No Movement Clause") without his consent.

It appears, if atybat's information is correct, that he was asked once last season to move, and declined.

Here's the other half of that: another team has to want him, before we can waive him. Unfortunately:

1) Nylander ("No Movement Clause") has a big salary cap hit, and even when he was playing regularly, his play did not live up to his pay.

In 72 games, Nylander posted 9 goals and 22 assists; he spent 32 minutes in the box, and had an average of 14:02 of ice time per game. He won nearly half of his faceoffs, at 45.9%, which put him right up the middle on that stat.

2) Nylander ("No Movement Clause") is 36 years old and has had injury problems in the past.

3) There are a limited number of teams for which Nylander ("No Movement Clause") would waive his No Movement Clause, and none of them have asked for him.

4) A team has to ask for Nylander before the No Movement Clause can even come into play.

I think the whole Nylander situation has been handled poorly. As Ted often states - we have assets and talks about the caps as a business. If you have a $5M asset that isnt' working out after you bent over backwards to lure him here vs. the Oilers when he became a free agent from the Rangers, surely you can figure out how to move him (no trade clause or otherwise).

In this salary cap era, it's amazing to me that we have $5M riding pine each night.

Also - this just in, Bourque has been claimed by the wizard of oz lollipop guild.

Nyls agreed to a trade to Chicago in the summer of 2008. He declined to waive his NMC to go to Pheonix in the winter of 2009. There has been no other requests to waive his NMC (as far as I know). It is sometimes customary to ask a player (through his agent) of a list of teams he would agree to go to but that is usually worked out in the contract discussions, not once the contract is signed.
For example, I believe that Lecavalier has a clause that stipulates that during the last year of his contract, he has to give the Bolts a list of teams (I believe it's 10)that he would agree to be traded to.
There are no such stipulation in Nylander's contract (obviously) and I don't think that GMGNM and Nyls's agent have gone that way...yet. It may be the next step.
I don't believe that Nyls would accept to be put on waivers.

(b) A no-move clause may prevent the involuntary relocation of a Player, whether by Trade, Loan or Waiver claim. A no-move clause, however, may not restrict the Club's buy-out and termination rights as set forth in this Agreement. Prior to exercising its Ordinary Course Buy-Out rights pursuant to Paragraph 13 of the SPC hereof, the Club shall, in writing in accordance with the notice provisions in Exhibit 3 hereof, provide the Player with the option of electing to be placed on Waivers. The Player will have twenty-four (24) hours from the time he receives such notice to accept or reject that option at his sole discretion, and shall so inform the Club in writing, in accordance with the notice provisions in Exhibit 3 hereof, within such twenty-four (24) hour period. If the Player does not timely accept or reject that option, it will be deemed rejected.

Bourque was put on waivers to give the CAPS an option on signing a different player off the waiver wire, if anyone peaked their interest... I'm sure they are also thinking that he won't get claimed by anyone... I hope he doesn't, so that he can have his night up in Boston... That may be all he gets here once Fehr and Fleischman return...

The team should figure out what to do with Nylander ("No Movement Clause") before Thursday, and based on what we've seen, it's highly unlikely that we're playing him. Since we can't waive Nylander ("No Movement Clause") and no one wants him in a trade, the only way to get him off the books is to convince him to go to Europe. Otherwise Nylander ("No Movement Clause") is just going to make a bunch of money sitting in the press box.

The no-movement clause is different than a "no-trade" clause in that with a no-trade clause, a player's consent is required before a trade involving that player is made. If a player has a no-movement clause, the player cannot be traded, waived, or sent down to the minors without that player's approval.

OK new rule. Any time anyone uses Nylander's name they must put the following immediately after:

"(No Movement Clause)"

Abbreviations are not acceptable as people don't apparently understand what it means.

This rule applies to Tarik, Mark Giannotto, Lindsay Applebaum, and anyone else reporting on the Caps.

Posted by: Greg S. | September 29, 2009 4:03 PM

@Greg S.:

ROTGDFLMMFAO, Greg; I just wish this drama about whether Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" skates or sits would come to an END!

Since it is unlikely that Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" will waive his "(No Movement Clause)", I think the best thing for the Caps to do in the short, medium and long term is to just PLAY the man!. Seriously folks, what are the possible outcomes?

1) Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" does great and we make the payoffs.
2) Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" turns out not so great and we still make the playoffs.
3) Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" gets injured. And we still make the playoffs.
4) We don't make the playoffs (God Forbid). Which--if such a horrible thing should happen--would be caused by things of far greater consequece than Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" skating in circles.

In most of these scenarios, Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" ends up having to WORK for his $4.5M/Year.

Wahtever your frustrations may be with regard to Nylander's "(No Movement Clause)" tendency to skate in circles or occasionally give up the puck, I think the balance of the talent we have on this club will more than outweigh any perceived harm done by Nylander's "(No Movement Clause)" perceived mistakes.

Like I said before: benching Nylander "(No Movement Clause)" indefinitely strikes me as petty and vindictive.